These centrifugal moon towers could be key to life off-planet
- Reference: 1657648819
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/07/12/the_moon_needs_spinning_gravity/
- Source link:
Kyoto University academics and folks at Kajima Construction, one of the largest building firms in Japan, have partnered on the concept, which they call "Luna Glass" and "Mars Glass."
If constructed, the glass towers would stand 400 meters tall (roughly the height of the Empire State Building in New York City) and 100 meters wide. To provide the gravity we're used to on our home world, the tower would spin on its central axis at a rate of one rotation every 20 seconds. The researchers said the towers would produce about 1G at their widest point, the same gravitational force as on Earth.
[1]
People would live on the inner walls of the tower, much like the Dyson Sphere featured in Star Trek: The Next Generation, the Halo rings of the eponymous game series, a [2]ring-like habitat considered by NASA, or any other number of science-fiction and proposed non-fiction contraptions relying on centrifugal force to generate artificial gravity.
Life on the inside of Luna Glass
"As space life becomes more realistic, low gravity on places like the lunar surface begin to be regarded as a problem," the researchers said in [3]an article announcing the concept (which was automatically translated). The team said low-gravity research on humans has been limited to adults, and that research has made it clear how much of a problem zero- or reduced-gravity has on human health.
[4]SpaceX Starship booster in flames after unexpected ignition
[5]ESA's 2030+ roadmap envisions Europeans on the Moon and Mars
[6]NanoAvionics satellite pulls out GoPro to take stunning selfie over Earth
[7]Returning to the Moon on the European Service Module
According to [8]NASA , astronauts in space lose muscle mass more quickly, are at increased risk for kidney stones and calcium deficiency, can experience vision problems, develop [9]enlarged brains , and lose 1 to 1.5 percent of the mineral density in weight-bearing bones per month. The Japanese team takes those concerns one step further: if people are going to be living in space, what is low gravity going to do to childhood development, and how will it complicate birth?
"We consider an artificial gravity living facility that can generate [1G to be] … the core technology for human beings to advance into space," the Japanese team said.
[10]
[11]
Here's a video of what the Mars tower might look like, according to the Kyoto eggheads:
[12]Youtube Video
[13]
In addition to developing the glass towers, the Kyoto/Kajima team said its conceptual view of space living also includes two other components: a "core biome" that consists of the minimal natural materials needed to supply a colony with food, clothing and shelter; and the "hexatrack," a train-like artificial gravity transport system designed to keep Moon- and Mars-bound colonists grounded during a long journey.
Yosuke Yamashiki, director at the Kyoto University division working on the project, said that while countries like the US and the United Arab Emirates are working toward Moon and Mars colonization, they have yet to touch on the three concepts his team has developed.
"These three pillars that we propose are core technologies that are not in the development plans of other countries and are indispensable for ensuring the realization of human space colonization in the future," Yamashiki said. ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Ys3vBD3ztl12NTtWxhsAzAAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_torus
[3] https://space.innovationkyoto.org/2022/07/06/coretechnology_kyoto_kajima/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/12/spacex_starship/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/05/esa_terrae_novae/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/29/nanoavionics_space_selfie/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/28/airbus_esm/
[8] https://www.nasa.gov/hrp/bodyinspace
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/15/astronaut_brain_matter/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Ys3vBD3ztl12NTtWxhsAzAAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Ys3vBD3ztl12NTtWxhsAzAAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o5VR7LpELo
[13] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Ys3vBD3ztl12NTtWxhsAzAAAAAw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: And the first meteor strike
... Then we hope that there's a camera to catch the fireworks. It'll be top of the news for at least a few days.
On a more serious note, this idea might have legs on Mars because the thin atmosphere provides some protection against meteors, but then again that also means there'll be storms. I personally think that there'll be plenty of things to kill everyone off earth, even without adding to them with something like this.
Not a new idea
Wow the bar to be a scientist seems to involve plagiarism these days. This sort of concept is FAR from new. The [1]Stanford Torus from the 70's were the first main group I know of for in space, More recently Isaac Arthur has covered the design on his youtube channel years ago (I cannot remember which episode). If you [2]look at Reddit there's a question there that is 5 years old
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_torus
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceDiscussion/comments/76qf0w/rotating_habitat_on_the_moons_surface_feasible/
Did you know
Isaac Arthur's half-brother is Clarke Asimov.
Interesting
It would be interesting to what happens when the abrasive lunar dust eats away at the bearings (interesting to watch from a safe distance that is)
Dealing with two "down" directions might be tough
If I'm reading this correctly, the centrifuge spins at 90 degrees from vertical, (meaning axis is vertical), so that primary "down" is lateral (towards the outer wall of the wheel).
However, even given a spin going at 1 G sideways, there's still the "real" down to worry about - 1/6 or 1/3 G, 90 degrees from the primary down.
Seems uncomfortable, or even dangerous.
Re: Dealing with two "down" directions might be tough
That's why the outer wall is curved like a wineglass. There's only one down.
Re: Dealing with two "down" directions might be tough
Dammit you beat me to it, although I wasn't going say "wine glass". You are obviously feeling a bit more inspired than I.
The 1g of normal gravity might feel nice and comfortable
The view out of the window is going to make you feel mightily sick.
Re: The 1g of normal gravity might feel nice and comfortable
No worse than riding in a car or a train, you'll just get bored with the number of repeats almost equalling freeview channels.
Not practical
The idea of a space station rotating to produce artificial gravity dates to Von Braun (helped by illustrator Chelsey Bonestell) in the early 50s. It made some sense in an era when space stations didn't have to move to dodge debris.
The idea of a spinning cylinder would also make some sense if you could bury the whole thing in a lined, pressurized tunnel (to protect it from Mars or Lunar dust).
But the materials and surface infrastructure needed to accomplish this make it a valid thought experiment but an absurd idea at the practical level.
Re: Not practical
Rather less clever engineering is required if you bury the structure and treat it like a fairground ride. Most of the mass of the mechanical support could be stationary and embedded in the rock.
Also note that you only need to provide 1G for the bit that people spend most of their lives in. Things like industrial or agricultural zones can make do. Also, humans can use avatars to go walkabout, so you probably need less living space than you think, even for an active lifestyle.
Re: Not practical
Low gravity is only one of the stumbling blocks on the path to colonising space - and probably the easiest to clear.
Others include getting materials there, keeping the vacuum outside of the habitat, and radiation in all its spectrum, are more immediate in effect.
Building habitats below the surface is just far more practical.
And definitely limit the scope of the centrifuge to human maintenance necessities - until such time your moon colony has sufficient surplus to support extravagances
Re: Not practical
I reckon it's about as practical as O'Neill cylinders, perhaps easier to build since the scale is smaller, but more vulnerable to issues involving bearing wear and so on.
Which is to say, not practical without some major technology steps first.
But that Bezos guy has the cash to make (some of) them happen, so maybe...?
practical but heavy
So this has the challenge of a high mass, so it will be expensive and resource intensive to set the first ones up. You wouldn't probably want to have to flat pack that and lift it off earth.
The bearings aren't going to need to be as exotic as you might think. Remember kids, Lunar gravity not earth gravity, and you only need to boost mars gravity, though that would be MUCH harder.
I'd look at liquid bearings, which would have the main drawback of relative power ineffeciency, but could be compensated on lunar deployment with more solar panels. They are cheap, reliable, and probably easier to fab from local material. You can also use the bearing fluid to help heat sink the waste heat from whatever is maintaining rotation. Magnetic would also address most of the concerns and may see secondary synergies if they are trying to shield the living space. I'd just bury the whole thing though. No reason to live on the surface of either mars or luna, which is also an answer to the meteor/radiation problems to some degree.
The lunar case is the more relevant as long term mars is farther off, and having heavy lift of luna will be more efficient than pushing everything off earth, so if we ever stay on mars it makes sense to set up spaceport on luna with an orbital gateway. As far as originality, the team never claimed to invent spin gravity, and while the back of the napkin though experiment may not be new, fleshing out the numbers is real and valid work, even if it's not realized for decades.
The same was true for the pioneering work on the science behind space station in LEO. Dreamt, then designed, then tested back in the Gemini/Spacelab era, and nearly a generation later, realized as the ISS.
Re: Not practical
And then there's the interesting effects of the Coriolis force on human beings when there is a relatively small radius relative to the centre of axis.
I reckon someone's been licking a toad on this one.
Stupid idea
This is like one of those nausea inducing fair-ground rides, except that they only last for five minutes, then you get to stagger off and recover in the nearest hedge.
It would work in free fall - in orbit. With a much larger diameter and a slower rotation.
Not on the Moon/Mars, with their own existing direction of down. You'd just be falling over sideways all the time. Also everything would be steeply uphill.
Ah, like The Ark in Space but hopefully without the giant parasitic wasp-things.
And then the bearings lock up, or the generator fails
And everyone falls to their deaths. Maybe they land in the water only slightly stunned. And then a boat lands on them.
I like the sailboat.
Definitely one for my packing list if I move off Earth.
And the first meteor strike
what happens then ?